Here is the link to an interview of Ashish Nandy (renowned political psychologist ) on Savarkar, the grandfather of Hindutvadi fascism.
While in jail, Savarkar wrote the work describing Hindutva, espousing Hindu nationalism. In 1921, under restrictions after signing a plea for clemency, he was released on the condition that he renounce revolutionary activities. Traveling widely, Savarkar became a forceful orator and writer, advocating Hindu political and social unity. Serving as the president of the Hindu Mahasabha, Savarkar endorsed the ideal of India as a Hindu Rashtra and opposed the Quit India struggle in 1942, calling it a "Quit India but keep your army" movement. He became a fierce critic of the Indian National Congress and its acceptance of India's partition. He was accused of the assassination of Indian leader Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi but acquitted by the court.
In his latest book, Nandy wrote, "Hindutva is an attack on Hinduism, that Hindutva is an ideology for those whose Hinduism has worn off, and that Hindutva’s triumph will mark the end of Hinduism.”
But most Hindutvadis may not know that Savarkar did not believe in anything (religious). "He refused to give a Hindu funeral to his own wife and said that there was nothing sacred about the cow. He also made fun of (RSS’s second sarsanghchalak) Golwalkar’s fondness for rituals. Savarkar is the real father of the emerging India. Gandhi is now the stepfather," says Nandy.
On the question of Indian nationalism, Nandy says, "It must be remembered that the Indic civilisation is different from the Indian nation-state, which is a European concoction just 300 years old.I have this confidence that it is just not possible to mobilise India into a homogenised nation. Tagore said there is no nation in India. That is why he wrote the English word ‘nation’ in Bengali. But he had 12 to 15 Bengali words for patriotism. Indians are patriotic. But patriotism is often confused with nationalism.
The nation is a demand for homogenising the people, leaving the individual face-to-face with the state. There is no interface—no community, no religion, no sect, no caste, no trade union, simply no intermediary structures. There is just the individual and the state in the ideal nation-state system. I don’t think Indians will go for this beyond a point."